GHULAM MUHAMMAD vs RIZWANA YASMEEN and others
This civil petition for leave to appeal before the Supreme Court arose from a judgment of the High Court dismissing a review petition. In the main constitutional petition, the High Court had fixed the value of dowry articles decreed in favor of the respondent at Rs. 500,000, adjusting the conflicting sums decreed by the Trial Court and Appellate Court. The petitioner did not directly challenge the main constitutional judgment but instead sought review before the High Court, raising objections under the Dowry and Bridal Gifts (Restriction) Act, 1976. The High Court dismissed the review application on the grounds that no error apparent on the face of the record existed, the statutory objection was never raised during previous stages, and the High Court possessed the jurisdiction to adjust the quantum of the financial award. The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's decision, holding that new factual objections regarding unclaimed dowry articles cannot be entertained for the first time arising out of review proceedings when they were not raised before the Trial Court. Consequently, leave to appeal was refused.
- Can an objection under the Dowry and Bridal Gifts (Restriction) Act, 1976 be raised for the first time in a review petition before the High Court?
- Does the High Court have jurisdiction in constitutional proceedings to modify or increase the quantum of a financial award for dowry articles?
- Can a party in proceedings arising out of a review petition raise a new factual ground regarding unclaimed dowry articles that was not raised before the Trial Court?
- Dowry And Bridal Gifts (Restriction) Act, 1976
ORDER
' UMAR ATA BANDIAL, J.---The judgment dated 06.10.2015 was delivered by the learned High Court in exercise of its Constitutional jurisdiction whereby the value of the dowry articles decreed in favour of the respondents was fixed at Rs,500,000/-. It is a figure that falls between the amount decreed by the learned Trial Court on 14.07.2014 at Rs, 617,200/- and the reduced amount of Rs,300,000/- fixed by the learned Appellate Court on 07.04.2015. The petitioner did not approach this Court against the said judgment of the learned High Court dated 06.10.2015 and instead filed a review petition before the learned High Court which was dismissed by means of the impugned judgment dated 28.10.2015. The grounds taken in review were rejected by the learned High Court for not representing an error apparent on the face of the record because the objection under the Dowry And Bridal Gifts (Restriction) Act, 1976 was never raised at any stage in the proceedings and the jurisdiction of the learned High Court to increase the quantum of A financial award to the respondent is not barred by any law.
2. Before us, the learned counsel has raised a third point that some dowry articles have been compensated although these are not claimed hi the list of articles attached with the plaint by the respondent. This is not a ground that arises out of review proceedings and ought to have been taken before the learned Trial Court.
' For the foregoing discussion we do not find any merit in this petition; as such the same is dismissed. Leave to appeal is declined.